Exam 22: Frustration: Contracts Discharged for Failure of a Basic Contractual Assumption

'In contracts in which the performance depends on the continued existence of a given person or thing, a condition is implied that the impossibility of performance arising from the perishing of the person or thing shall excuse the performance'. This is an absolute rule of law.

A contract cannot be frustrated if the event in question is caused by one of the parties to the contract, or arises from a breach of contract from of the parties.

Which of the following is true regarding the consequences of frustration under the Law Reform (Frustrated Contracts) Act 1943?

In which of the following situations is frustration least likely to apply?

Following the passing of the Law Reform (Frustrated Contracts) Act 1943, there is no longer any need to consider recovery of benefits conferred by reference to the common law of unjust enrichment.

The court may look beyond the written contract when considering whether the occurrence of an event constituted a fundamental common assumption, the cancellation of which frustrates the contract.

Which of the following are implied conditions whose failure may frustrate a contract? Please select all that apply.

Why is a contract for the sale of goods which fit a particular description unlikely to be frustrated if the goods are destroyed before ownership passes?